Breaking Supreme Court Legal Update
New Delhi · Monday, 03 August 2026 9888666310 | [email protected]
Free Law — free judgments and free headnotes Free Lawby De Jure
Supreme Court of India 2021-05-25 partly_allowed

SUNIL KUMAR @ SUDHIR KUMAR & ANR vs THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

Bench: 2 — Dinesh Maheshwari, Aniruddha Bose

In Brief

The appellants were convicted of kidnapping, abducting, and raping a 13-year-old girl in 2008. The trial court sentenced them to 5, 7, and 10 years respectively but did not specify whether sentences should run concurrently or consecutively. The High Court modified only default stipulations. The Supreme Court held that courts must explicitly specify whether sentences run concurrently or consecutively; silence means consecutive running. However, in light of the appellants' 13 years of imprisonment already served, good conduct, and extreme disproportionality, the Court capped maximum imprisonment at 14 years using Article 142 powers, balancing punishment with justice.

The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.

Criminal Procedure Sentencing Concurrent and Consecutive Sentences Multiple Offences Proportionality Child Sexual Abuse Kidnapping Rape

Read the full judgment & headnote. It's free.

Register to read the complete Supreme Court judgment text and the headnote, and to search 1 lakh+ Supreme Court judgments by meaning. It is a free service.

Register Free Login